Here Lies Love and Live Musicians- Page 3

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 8:03pm

This isn't the sole point of the thread, but I have to laugh at the arbitrary nature of some of those house minimums compared to others of similar size. It is like the League and AFM are asking people not to take this rule seriously. Hopefully illustrates that the method for determining band size needs to change to something more standardized!

Thanks, HeyMrMusic, for that list (apologies if any transcription errors were made while quickly dropping them into spreadsheet for comparison)

List

.

 

 

[BoringBoredBoard40]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 8:04pm

boy what a mess

[Kad]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 8:08pm

The “karaoke” concept excuse is a cop-out if the show resembles its prior productions- I can only remember one number using that conceit, and it’s the title song. 

The lack of live musicians is a clear cost cutting measure if nothing else- and this production is going to need to cut costs wherever it can. 

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 8:16pm

I’m sure there’s an explanation why minimums aren’t solely based on seating capacity. I wonder if it’s things like size of pit/backstage areas. That said, reducing capacity, like what they’re doing at Here Lies Love, does not reduce the minimum.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 9:06pm

Wow, it is so tedious how much misinformation drives posts on this board. It's getting almost as bad as twitter et al. So let's review what we now know, both sides having posted "official" renditions of what's going on. 

1, Contrary to what appeared to be the case, both sides have been engaged in the contractual process for lowering the minimum for this show since early on.

2. That process appears to be moving slowly. Not sure who is at fault for that but it is likely both sides though I am leaning toward it being more management. 

3. The union's statement is hyperbolic and unhelpful. The production's statement is more measured but also not helpful. Reading between the lines, if this isn't resolved, the production will pay for the full complement until it is. And the union bluster is there to make it clear that that is not negotiable. 

4. I don't like games. On either side. 

5. There will never be any change in what transpires onstage. Nor should there be. 

6. 802 describes this as existential to them. What's happening may be more existential than they think.

[betyourass]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 9:23pm

Summed that up so well. There are so many things that are more of an existential threat...

[blaxx]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 9:36pm

Kad said: "The “karaoke” concept excuse is a cop-out if the show resembles its prior productions- I can only remember one number using that conceit, and it’s the title song.

The lack of live musicians is a clear cost cutting measure if nothing else- and this production is going to need to cut costs wherever it can."

It's an awful precedent.

Any creative can claim this moving forward.

Can't believe they are getting away with this like an entitled little kid.

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 9:38pm

I can see the union’s fears, though. If this show wins on a concept of “we’re artistically performing karaoke to prerecorded music,” it sets a precedent for other future shows to do the same and not engage in hiring musicians. It’s the union’s job to protect the number of union jobs on a given production, but it is also their job to hear why a show should be considered a “special situation” and hire fewer than the minimum. With all of these articles released today, it’s obvious that the union rejects the show’s petition to hire fewer than 19 (the 40-plus hired musicians on the previous albums don’t help). I think if the show made a better case, the union would have understood and made a compromise, like they’ve done on any show that doesn’t meet a theatre’s minimum. Many such shows are currently playing.

[Kad]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 9:43pm

I am curious about the union does handle compensation regarding playing on a track in a show, though. Equity requires a two-week payment for actors appearing only in filmed material that is part of shows (or used to, last when I was knowledgeable about such things).

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 11:24pm

They might have wanted to have this nailed before they gutted the theatre.

I’m getting the feeling we are edging toward Great Comet flop territory. Spending exorbitant sums of money on a show that was a modest downtown hit. The original show had a moment. I liked it immensely. Loved the music. It’s a very different time. Since I saw the show I’ve researched the history.  
 

Imelda is vile. She and her family are criminals. I no longer have any interest in dancing around her. It’s kinda hideous actually. 
 

Whats next? A disco dancing twerking Melania? Ivanka? Marjorie Taylor Greene? Fierce. 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 11:29pm

HeyMrMusic said: "I can see the union’s fears, though. If this show wins on a concept of “we’re artistically performing karaoke to prerecorded music,” it sets a precedent for other future shows to do the same and not engage in hiring musicians."

Serious question: do you honestly think there is a risk that Broadway will be overtaken by karaoke shows? To me, this is a lousy hill to die on. To me, it undercuts the real issue, which is serious.

"It’s the union’s job to protect the number of union jobs on a given production, but it is also their job to hear why a show should be considered a “special situation” and hire fewer than the minimum. With all of these articles released today, it’s obvious that the union rejects the show’s petition to hire fewer than 19 (the 40-plus hired musicians on the previous albums don’t help). I think if the show made a better case, the union would have understood and made a compromise, like they’ve done on any show that doesn’t meet a theatre’s minimum. Many such shows are currently playing."

This is not an accurate. The special situation process is not a unilateral union determination; as rehearsed, it is a committee decision and the committee has both parties and neutrals voting. Now the union can make it easy or hard, but they can't "reject." 

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 11:51pm

Actually, I know how the special situation committee hearings work. While the vote from the neutral panel hasn’t happened yet, the union has made their stance clear that they do reject the production’s petition to be considered a special situation. It’s now up to neutral parties now, and usually these things are done without a big blowup like this, so I have no idea how it will affect any decision-making.

To answer your other question, while other shows may not go all the way to zero musicians like this show, a win for David Byrne and Co. would set a precedent that all a production needs to say is that “it’s our artistic decision” and they’d be allowed to ignore theatre minimums. I don’t even think Here Lies Love’s argument is very compelling, but you can see how easy it is for them to say “that’s our concept” and bypass any agreements.

I believe the union is renegotiating their contract later this year, so this is an interesting prelude.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 5/30/23 at 11:58pm

Reading between the lines:

When it comes to electronic music, 802 has fallen behind and is now trying to play catchup as they pay the price. We've seen with a number of shows that 15 can sound like 20-30 with a really savvy electronic music design. 802 already has keyboard-playing members whose job is basically to serve as a technician to operate a keyboard with a lot of pre-programmed music to replace live instruments. And to the naked ear it sounds pretty good. There was an article a few months ago about electronic music in national tours, which I'm now having trouble finding. And now keyboard programming and electronic music design is a cottage industry itself.

That doesn't mean you should do CAMELOT or CAROUSEL with 14 + Ableton (though maybe the production's concept could justify it). Nor does that mean electronic music design isn't an artform, because it is. But the template is already set for newer shows now.

Updated On: 5/31/23 at 11:58 PM

[bear88]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 12:57am

I know nothing about any of this and am grateful there is finally some news coverage of the dispute.

My gut reaction is that both sides will probably lose here. The producers are vulnerable because they’ve spent big money remodeling a theater for an unproven Broadway musical and are now in a battle with a union at a really bad time to be in a battle with a union. Their argument - that karaoke is their artistic concept which justifies no musicians - strikes me as weak and kind of an excuse to avoid paying the musicians for a Broadway musical.

But the union is vulnerable here too. If they help kill the show, more than a few people will blame them. Some of the ‘number of musician’ rules seem arbitrary and the big, old-fashioned orchestra - while appealing to someone like me - is often unnecessary depending on the show. I don’t think the union’s big concern is that Broadway will be overrun with karaoke musicals. Their big concern, or it would be if I were them, is that the Here Lies Love producers will get away with their ‘artistic vision’ excuse and the next creative will say his vision is to recreate a vast sound with a 50-piece orchestra of tracked nonunion musicians without an orchestra pit in the way - and the audience won’t really care.

The cost of putting on a new musical is daunting. The recent flurry of star-filled revivals that have done well is an interesting mini-trend, but it doesn’t always work and Broadway needs exciting new work to survive and thrive. Where does the traditional orchestra fit in with that? The battle over Here Lies Love feels like a chapter in a much larger book.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 12:57am

@Mr Music I think we can agree re the committee. On the "precedent," we disagree primarily because i think you are minimizing the facts here. This is not just a matter of "saying" it is an artistic decision but demonstrating it. Some here think it is all about money, but what I see is a show built on the karaoke concept long before anyone is thinking of Broadway and tbh for a long time since the Public, I don't think anyone envisioned this show as it is now. It surprises me that we have folks who have seen the show who don't "believe" the karaoke thing. Ah well. We shall see but as I said in the earlier post, to me (and the creatives no doubt) this show makes no sense with live music. 

@Ermengarde good points. As I alluded to earlier, the 802 existential crisis is not what happens here but what a mess the standard is. The fact is, we have musicals of a wide variety, from those that ought to have a lush 30 piece orchestra to those that don't really need one. In between are most shows. (Kad indirectly raises a point worthy of consideration, should there be a different compensation model altogether?) Technology has altered the balance in almost every industry and yet the orchestra has remained relatively immune. How long is that viable? We have new musicals on Broadway that make the new existential question clear. The shows making money on the wallets of the "next" generation of theatregoers,& Juliet and Six, eschew the orchestrations of Camelot. To quote A. Burr, the world is wide enough for the variety. 802 is at a crossroads, with a contract coming up. While the cries of "precedent" attach to what is perceived as a crisis, it does a terrible job of positioning the union for the future. Therein is the real crisis. To suggest that musicians need artificial support is to give away the essence of what it means to be a musician. In the theatre, we cannot afford to lose sight of what makes the theatre unique and precious. (And that includes live performance on every level.)

[blaxx]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 1:13am

I'm more surprised this is just news today.

No way they risked all they have so far to "surprise" everyone with the decision. And no way the production just expected the union to accept before completely tearing the theater apart.

Not even an amateur producer would do that. This is sketchy. 

[dramamama611]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 1:17am

I'm confused, having not seen the show, so hoping someone can shed some light on this for me. I can't quite wrap my head around the concept of recorded music for live singing for 2 reasons: 1. I dont remember discos (my understanding for the setting) having karaoke 2. Singing in musicals is an extention of thoughts/feeling, so not "actually" happening , so the "concept " is kind of lost on me.  I'm sure I'm missing something here, but I want to have an informed background

[blaxx]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 1:36am

dramamama611 said: "I'm confused, having not seen the show, so hoping someone can shed some light on this for me. I can't quite wrap my head around the concept of recorded music for live singing for 2 reasons: 1. I dont remember discos (my understanding for the setting) having karaoke 2. Singing in musicals is an extention of thoughts/feeling, so not "actually" happening , so the "concept " is kind of lost on me. I'm sure I'm missing something here, but I want to have an informed background"

It's just a bunch of people who realized that removing hundreds of seats from a theater and paying musicians didn't really add up.

So now they think they found a loophole and added a sprinkle of victimization to it for dramatic effect. 

[jkcohen626]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 1:47am

dramamama611 said: "I'm confused, having not seen the show, so hoping someone can shed some light on this for me. I can't quite wrap my head around the concept of recorded music for live singing for 2 reasons: 1. I dont remember discos (my understanding for the setting) having karaoke 2. Singing in musicals is an extention of thoughts/feeling, so not "actually" happening , so the "concept " is kind of lost on me. I'm sure I'm missing something here, but I want to have an informed background"

I haven't seen it yet (July 11th, can't wait!). But, my understanding is that this is a musical that is almost a play within a play. The actors are playing the staff of the Millenium Club playing the characters of Imelda Marcos' life. So the singing is the karaoke performance of the club staff. 

The other thing I'd say is that, even withholding that layer, shows have a distinct sound or genre that ties into their vision all the time. Not sure how this is different than that. 

[GiantsInTheSky2]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 8:55am

Strictly out of curiosity - if this is an immersive experience, and they are to have a live band, won’t they then need to install monitors all over the space for the cast to watch for conductor cues? I imagine that would be very distracting and take audiences out of the moment. They’d probably have to restate/block just to get that sorted out. 

People are already causing fake-controversy (I’ve already seen over a dozen “wow they’re glamorizing the family how dare they” posts online by people who haven’t even looked up the plot or listened to a second of the score despite both being available for a decade), and now this is spreading like wildfire. People have also been pointing out the white creatives which is a whole other can of worms. I highly doubt this is the first time there has been negotiations regarding special cases for changing the minimum. 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 9:19am

The internet can truly be an awful place. 

How did American Psycho skirt this issue? I remember seeing it with like two "musicians." Did they just pay the minimum? On one hand, I think that rule is pretty stupid. Like if they don't need a full orchestra, why make someone pay for it? That's only going to make less people want to try new things. But on the other hand, I can see the benefits. Maybe stuff like this is better suited for a less traditional setting like Broadway.

[perfectlymarvelous]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 10:15am

American Psycho *didn't* skirt the issue, they received permission from the union to hire fewer musicians than the house minimum for the Schoenfeld. They're far from the only production to have done this, and I believe they had 4 musicians on the show (3 players and the conductor). The concept for that show was EDM/house music and they still managed to figure out a way to do that with live musicians.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 11:26am

So just to be clear based on the production's statement:

They have indeed hired 3 actor-musicians? (And, presumably, a conductor.) Or that concept is no longer being used for Broadway?

[Voter]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 11:36am

ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "So just to be clear based on the production's statement:

They have indeed hired 3 actor-musicians? (And, presumably, a conductor.) Or that concept is no longer being used for Broadway?"

 

Are those AEA contracts or 802 contracts, though?

 

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 5/31/23 at 11:48am

Three actors play instruments on one song. The production has asked to count those towards the minimum. I personally think the union shouldn’t. What they play doesn’t take the place of a professional musician. 

I would be so much more sympathetic to the case if I knew the show were supposed to be karaoke and if the genre of the music did call for only tracks. I saw the production multiple times at the Public and didn’t realize the actors weren’t the characters…they were supposed to be people performing karaoke? The only “karaoke” I remember in the show was the curtain call, where the invited the audience to sing along and they displayed lyrics on the projections. The recorded music itself also has so much acoustic instrumentation even beyond the electronic music (winds, brass, strings, percussion, acoustic guitar, upright bass, drums), and while it would be a big project for a sound designer to mimic the slickness of a produced record, it’s not impossible to do that live. The electronic elements could have been a combination of tracks and triggers/synths/v-drums. That’s the common way to do things, both in theatre and actual pop acts. The “concept” can be executed by design elements and orchestration. If anything, you can have musicians trigger the tracks instead of AEA stage managers or IATSE sound mixers. There could have been a way to include the union instead of shutting them out.